zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

I understand and I agree that different mods jumping in could be very confusing. However that is not the case here since this has been an ongoing thing with only him. Even when I’m conversing with another mod.

B, I alerted the other mods that you said this. No one has disagreed with how I am handling this.

This thread is about “mod actions” and that is exactly what I have been discussing.

So you alerted the other mods. Did you provide them with my explanation which you deleted? And for what good reason would the explanation be deleted if honest communication to foster better posting was truly the goal?

InvaderRam wrote:

i don’t know about quitting. i will say that it is my opinion that fisher lost the team. whether that means they stopped believing in the system. or they lost confidence. or they turned on the coach. i have no clue.

but i do believe the coaching staff lost the players.

That is true. I think the lack of support for Keenum didn’t help either.

Billy_T wrote:

That’s one poll, bnw. And Rasmussen is well-known for its Republican bias.

Best to look at the polls in the aggregate.

This is a pretty good source for that:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

____

Trump has the lowest approval rate of any incoming president in decades.

Trump’s approval rating is the lowest of any incoming president in nearly 25 years Sonam Sheth Dec. 21, 2016, 1:33 PM

excerpt:

President-elect Donald Trump’s transition approval rating is lower than that of his predecessors over almost the past 25 years, according to a new Gallup poll.

Trump’s approval rating hovers around 48%, which is at least 17 percentage points lower than the lowest approval rating that any of the past three presidents had during his transition.

George W. Bush had a 65% approval rating when he first took office, Bill Clinton took office with a 67% rating, and Barack Obama entered with a 75% rating.

Trump’s disapproval rating of 48% during his transition is also the highest of any president in the past quarter-century. The Gallup study notes that a potential factor driving down the president-elect’s approval rating is that members of the opposing party are much more critical of Trump than they were of previous opponents.

Obama and Clinton had approval ratings of nearly 50% from members of the Republican Party, while Bush’s was almost 50% from Democrats.

According to the poll, Trump’s support among members of his own party, 86%, also lags behind Bush’s Republican support (93%). He also does significantly worse among independents than his predecessors did.

Your post is irrelevant. Trump’s support among republicans is the issue. The Rasmussen poll specifically addresses his support amongst republicans.

PA Ram wrote:

bnw wrote:

PA Ram wrote:

Holy crap there are some really smart people on this board.

I don’t know how the heck I slipped through the door but it’s very cool to read about these things. Just for fun, I’m going to ask my wife if she knows where our particle accelerator is.

She will quickly tell me to look up my ass.

She is actually correct.

She’s ALWAYS correct. Just ask her.

Thats that extra X chromosome in play.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

And… statement 1 covers a much broader range of things than statement 2 does.

1: We did not make an assessment of the impact of Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.

2: Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

Statement 1 is not about or just about voting machines. And in terms of statement 2, saying there is no evidence of a particular action existing is not the same as making an assessment.

The 2 are not equivalent statements.

Oh yes they are when taken in the context of what Trump said. He said that the Russians had no effect upon the election. As in votes. That is fact.

Trump lied about what the report and the intel agencies said. He tried to make it sound like they agree with him. They don’t. Far, far from it. They said, yes, the Russians hacked our system and tried to impact our election. Their purview did not include a study of “did this work or not?” So Trump lied when he claims they said it didn’t impact the election. They were never tasked with an analysis about that and never said it did not.

And you don’t need to gain control of voting machines in order to change the election results. It’s pretty obvious that the endless attention spent by the media on the emails, along with the GOP’s, did change voters’ minds. They actually told us it did.

So, logically, yes, what they did DEFINITELY impacted the results.

Trump just can’t accept the truth, and as a habitual liar, keeps gaslighting the country.

Complete BS. Trump told the truth. Maddox was again caught in a lie, er FAKE NEWS.

The emails are a big deal. Just like the grabbing pussy video. But crickets about all the time given to that video. Such hypocrisy.

Trump lied again, and the evidence is beyond argument about that. We have the report itself, and his response on tape. There is no way to spin that, bnw, unless you buy into his frame which is a lie to begin with.

It’s a lie to say the report and the intel agencies said there was no impact on the election. Again, they never made that claim or remotely implied that. It wasn’t their job to analyze the actual results of the hacks. As in, did it work or not, and, if so, how much. That was never their task.

As for the relative media time spent on the emails versus the Access Hollywood video? If you take in the entire campaign period, nothing received more time than the emails. Nothing came close. And when Comey broke all precedent and brought it up again at the eleventh hour, it dominated the news again.

There is nothing “hypocritical” about stating the facts. And the facts tell us Trump lied, again.

More BS. Dems had that video all along and chose to release it during the debates for maximum effect.

Billy_T wrote:

Trump would have been defeated by Sanders and a dozen other Dems, in my view. His support is so thin it wouldn’t have been tough. The “anti-Clinton” vote was bigger than the “pro-Trump” vote, by light years.

Wrong again. From, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2017/gop_voters_more_aligned_with_trump_than_congress

GOP Voters More Aligned With Trump Than Congress

Monday, January 09, 2017

Most voters share the views of the president and the party coming to power, but Republicans identify a lot more with Donald Trump than with the GOP Congress.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 53% of all Likely U.S. Voters identify with the GOP team: 37% feel Trump’s views are closest to their own when it comes to the major issues facing the country, while another 16% feel most closely in sync with the average Republican member of Congress. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say the views of the average Democratic member of Congress are closest to their own. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Among Republicans, however, 63% say that Trump’s views are closest to their own when it comes to the major issues, while only 27% say that of the views of the average Republican member of Congress. Among Democrats, 72% identify with the average Congress member from their party, while just 16% think Trump’s views are closest to theirs.

Just a month before Election Day, 51% of GOP voters still felt that their party’s leaders didn’t want Trump to be president, although that was down from 66% four months earlier.

(Want a free daily email update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on January 3-4, 2017 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

More than half of all voters feel comfortable with the prospect of one party controlling both the Executive and Legislative branches of government, as Republicans will do when Trump enters the White House on January 20.

Among voters not affiliated with either major political party, 34% say their views most closely match Trump’s, while 16% are more aligned with the average GOP representative. Only 29% feel closer to the average Democrat in Congress, but 20% of these voters are undecided.

The Republican team of Trump and Congress earn majority support in most demographic categories, but the president-elect is the one voters are most likely to agree with.

Women, middle-aged voters and blacks lean more heavily than the others in the direction of the average Democrat in Congress.

Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of the job President Obama is doing, 76% say Trump’s views are closest to their own, compared to only 18% who say the same of the average GOP member of Congress.

Voters aren’t sure if the new Congress will be an improvement on the last one, but most want Congress to cooperate with Trump as much as possible. Fifty-four percent (54%) think major legislation to improve the country is likely to be passed during Trump’s first 100 days in office.

But only 48% of voters are confident that Trump and Congress will work together to do what’s best for the American people.

House Speaker Paul Ryan has gone from publicly criticizing Trump when he was the GOP’s presidential nominee to enthusiastically embracing him as president-elect. Following the election, Ryan is much more popular with his fellow Republicans and is better liked by all voters than any other congressional leader of either major party.

Last August, 47% of GOP voters sad their party should be more like Trump than Ryan. Thirty-six percent (36%) felt it should be more like Ryan.

Seventy-six percent (76%) of GOP voters told Rasmussen Reports last March that Republicans in Congress have lost touch with their party’s base. That’s consistent with Republican voter attitudes for years but was the highest finding since we first asked this question just after Election Day in November 2008. Democrats have always been much more enthusiastic about their congressional representatives.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

And… statement 1 covers a much broader range of things than statement 2 does.

1: We did not make an assessment of the impact of Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.

2: Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

Statement 1 is not about or just about voting machines. And in terms of statement 2, saying there is no evidence of a particular action existing is not the same as making an assessment.

The 2 are not equivalent statements.

Oh yes they are when taken in the context of what Trump said. He said that the Russians had no effect upon the election. As in votes. That is fact.

Trump lied about what the report and the intel agencies said. He tried to make it sound like they agree with him. They don’t. Far, far from it. They said, yes, the Russians hacked our system and tried to impact our election. Their purview did not include a study of “did this work or not?” So Trump lied when he claims they said it didn’t impact the election. They were never tasked with an analysis about that and never said it did not.

And you don’t need to gain control of voting machines in order to change the election results. It’s pretty obvious that the endless attention spent by the media on the emails, along with the GOP’s, did change voters’ minds. They actually told us it did.

So, logically, yes, what they did DEFINITELY impacted the results.

Trump just can’t accept the truth, and as a habitual liar, keeps gaslighting the country.

Complete BS. Trump told the truth. Maddox was again caught in a lie, er FAKE NEWS.

The emails are a big deal. Just like the grabbing pussy video. But crickets about all the time given to that video. Such hypocrisy.

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

And… statement 1 covers a much broader range of things than statement 2 does.

1: We did not make an assessment of the impact of Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.

2: Yet in the report its stated that no evidence of Russian tampering with voting machines was found.

Statement 1 is not about or just about voting machines. And in terms of statement 2, saying there is no evidence of a particular action existing is not the same as making an assessment.

The 2 are not equivalent statements.

Oh yes they are when taken in the context of what Trump said. He said that the Russians had no effect upon the election. As in votes. That is fact.

PA Ram wrote:

Holy crap there are some really smart people on this board.

I don’t know how the heck I slipped through the door but it’s very cool to read about these things. Just for fun, I’m going to ask my wife if she knows where our particle accelerator is.

She will quickly tell me to look up my ass.

She is actually correct.

TSRF wrote:

Actually, I am going to Massachusetts General Hospital.

They have a proton beam therapy center. During off hours, they rent out beam time to companies like mine who need to test hardware under a proton environment.

We are building hardware for the (name deleted) satellites.

It sounds interesting, but once you get there and get set up and start the 8 hour test protocol, it is like watching paint dry.

I was thinking SNS.

Zooey wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

Zooey wrote:

Yeah, I’ve been thinking about how lucky we are the Rams don’t have to go on the road this year in the playoffs.

I see your jubilation over Seattle’s playoff victory yesterday hasn’t tempered your sarcasm.

Nice.

You just have no idea how LIBERATING it is to get in touch with your inner Seahawk.

That is nasty.

zn wrote:

For the most part, it’s remarkable how well this board is doing in comparison to previous incarnations.

Some things though.

* the rules are written a certain way and have to be enforced that way (to get around that suggest changes to the wording of the rules). One thing that was deliberately put in there–there is no arguing about, debating, or complaining about mod actions IN PUBLIC once a mod says “move on.” Believe me that was written with the experience of previous board incarnations in mind. There are people who just want to fight, and even if that’s no one here, the rules exclude that. Move on means move on, it’s over. Regardless.

* if you don’t think a mod action was fair, that means don’t fight about it in public. Contact the mod (through private chat here or through email, zackneruda@gmail.com). But you will probably get this answer. On THIS board, given its nature, the onus is on the poster to make it apparent they are not attacking other posters or being openly hostile and anatagonistic in discussion. So phrase your posts accordingly.

When I get deleted on other boards and regard it as not warranted, I don’t complain in public. I re-write the post so it is CLEAR that it is not violating rules.

So for example. ME: that was really stupid.
RESULT: delete
ME, REWRITE: that play by Quick was really stupid (talking about the play, this isn’t aimed at a poster).

I probably have to do that on some other boards at least once a week.

So,

* move on means move on…unless we change the rules.

* corollary: if you have an issue with a mod don’t raise it in public.

* the onus HERE on THIS forum, because it deals with fraught issues, is to make it openly clear you’re not attacking posters personally. That is far less true of the Rams forum.

So instead of this:

ME: that was stupid
Do this:
ME: IMO the thing Mao said about lots of flowers blooming was stupid.

Just try and reduce antagonism. And the experiment with having a politics board could just work.

Responses welcome. Respond to this post, though, please, in ways that don’t violate the rules. Which is very do-able.

…

With all due respect in regards to moderating there is no way to get around this, you are the problem. This place has at least 5 or 6 mods and only you claim there is an issue with what or how I post. That even goes for when I’m posting to another mod. So all that can be deduced from my experience is that your style of moderating is overzealous at best, prejudicial at worst.

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

She hasn’t testified to anything yet and this is not directed at posters but at the crybabies who are already wetting themselves. Can’t do any worse than what we have now.

And who are these crybabies you refer to.

Sore losers unwilling to await the confirmation hearings. And bedwetters. Definitely bedwetters.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

This isn’t about the pledge of allegiance or the Lord’s Prayer (although I’m opposed to students being asked to recite either in a public school…).

This is what it’s about…

Ms. DeVos is a chip off the old block. At a 2001 gathering of conservative Christian philanthropists, she singled out education reform as a way to “advance God’s kingdom.”

She wants to use education to forward the religious right’s agenda.

That is HER opinion. You vote for YOUR school board accordingly.

She’ll be setting federal policy, bnw. So that makes it a national problem on a huge scale.

Trump has brought in a host of swamp creatures, including the most billionaires, CEOs and Wall Street big wigs in our history. And most of the people he’s tasked with running this or that agency have a long record of battling them in order to increase their own wealth, undermining them, suing them to increase their own wealth, or seeking their destruction. Devos is easily one of the worst possible choices for the job she’s going to hold. She wants to do away with public education itself, and privatize it to make way for a theocracy instead.

That’s like the Rams hiring a football coach who hates the NFL, hates LA, hates football in general, and hates team sports.

She hasn’t testified to anything yet and this is not directed at posters but at the crybabies who are already wetting themselves. Can’t do any worse than what we have now.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by bnw.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

And I’m still waiting for you to actually answer a single one of my questions.

I answer your questions. It is you who ignores my questions. So why should I continue to extend such courtesy when I am routinely censored? Again enjoy and run with your safe space!

No, bnw, you haven’t answered my questions. Like:

They don’t “shine the spotlight on government corruption, malfeasance, lies etc.” If they did that, we would have had a massive leak about the Republicans too. Who controls Congress, bnw? Who controls most of the states?

Do you honestly believe “corruption, malfeasance, lies, etc.” only comes from the Democrats?

Why do you support the leaking of private information without permission when Assange does it?

For starters.

Listen to the very recent Hannity interview of Assange in which your questions are answered by Assange.

I bid you good day in the other thread, but will respond here before I go:

How can Assange answer those questions for you? I wanted to know your view of these things.

Because in this case we have the luxury of Assange answering those very questions you for some reason seem intent upon asking me and when I continually respond with Assange’s own replies which are somehow never enough for you.